30 days later and I finall got my number ported fro AT&T Wireless

MPN <[email protected]> wrote:
> Well Steven,
>
> The way I understand it is that AT&T Wireless sold GSM service to their TDMA
> subscribers and anyone else for that matter at cheaper rates with a free
> phone, KNOWING FULLY WELL that the service would be UNSATISFACTORY as their
> equipment here in the US was NOT totally compatible with GSM due to their
> existing antennas are NOT tunable to GSM's higher frequency as well as other
> equipment compatibility issues.

I do know that AT&T has had buttloads of problems with their GSM service. You
may indeed have a very valid reason to demand that the ETF be waived, but I
wouldn't just ignore it, I'd call AT&T and talk to them. And be prepared for
the possibility that you might have to go to court (either by suing them or
being sued by them).

Ignore the issue, and AT&T will be able to use your inactivity against you.
Try to work things out with them before the problem comes to a head, and
you will have MUCH more leverage. (Especially if the matter goes to court.
The judge will have much more sympathy for you if [s]he sees that you tried
to resolve things on your own first.)

> I was told that I will get forms in my final bill along with a EARLY
> TERMINATION CHARGE to submit to the FCC and PUC to dispute any Early
> Termination Charges.

Hm. Which state do you live in? I know in Ohio, the PUC didn't regulate
wireless. Some states do, some don't.

> By the way, AT&T Wireless is having several Class Action Lawsuits filed
> against them for this reason ! ! !

I'm not surprised. With their TDMA network they traditionally had a reputation
for very good service, but when ATTWS shoots themselves in the foot, they do
not just do it quietly, they make a big spectacle of it. (Examples: the GSM
buildout and their infamous NYC capacity problems several years ago, which also
caused them to get sued.)

I have three lines, two with Verizon and one with Sprint, and I'm glad none of
them are with AT&T...

--
JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services
22674 Motnocab Road * Apple Valley, CA 92307-1950
Steve Sobol, Geek In Charge * 888.480.4NET (4638) * [email protected]

---

› See More: 30 days later and I finall got my number ported fro AT&T Wireless

Hi Steven,

I have NO INTENTION of IGNORING them. They did a BAD BAD thing by selling a
service to consumers as they KNOWINGLY steered their subscribers into GSM
plans that they knew the QUALITY would be unacceptable . . .


"Steven J Sobol" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> MPN <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Well Steven,
> >
> > The way I understand it is that AT&T Wireless sold GSM service to their
TDMA
> > subscribers and anyone else for that matter at cheaper rates with a free
> > phone, KNOWING FULLY WELL that the service would be UNSATISFACTORY as
their
> > equipment here in the US was NOT totally compatible with GSM due to
their
> > existing antennas are NOT tunable to GSM's higher frequency as well as
other
> > equipment compatibility issues.
>
> I do know that AT&T has had buttloads of problems with their GSM service.
You
> may indeed have a very valid reason to demand that the ETF be waived, but
I
> wouldn't just ignore it, I'd call AT&T and talk to them. And be prepared
for
> the possibility that you might have to go to court (either by suing them
or
> being sued by them).
>
> Ignore the issue, and AT&T will be able to use your inactivity against
you.
> Try to work things out with them before the problem comes to a head, and
> you will have MUCH more leverage. (Especially if the matter goes to court.
> The judge will have much more sympathy for you if [s]he sees that you
tried
> to resolve things on your own first.)
>
> > I was told that I will get forms in my final bill along with a EARLY
> > TERMINATION CHARGE to submit to the FCC and PUC to dispute any Early
> > Termination Charges.
>
> Hm. Which state do you live in? I know in Ohio, the PUC didn't regulate
> wireless. Some states do, some don't.
>
> > By the way, AT&T Wireless is having several Class Action Lawsuits filed
> > against them for this reason ! ! !
>
> I'm not surprised. With their TDMA network they traditionally had a
reputation
> for very good service, but when ATTWS shoots themselves in the foot, they
do
> not just do it quietly, they make a big spectacle of it. (Examples: the
GSM
> buildout and their infamous NYC capacity problems several years ago, which
also
> caused them to get sued.)
>
> I have three lines, two with Verizon and one with Sprint, and I'm glad
none of
> them are with AT&T...
>
> --
> JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services
> 22674 Motnocab Road * Apple Valley, CA 92307-1950
> Steve Sobol, Geek In Charge * 888.480.4NET (4638) * [email protected]
>


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.555 / Virus Database: 347 - Release Date: 12/23/2003